High CourtsDivision Bench(1915) 09 MAD CK 0016

S.M. Venkatarama Aiyar vs Raja Gopala Iyer and Others

Madras High Court · Decided on 16 September 1915 · Citation: AIR 1916 Mad 680(1) : 31 Ind. Cas. 704

HON’BLE JUDGES
Spencer, J · Coutts-Trotter, J

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

10 paragraphs · 206 words
1.

The learned District Judge professed to decide this case after consideration of the terms of the partition-deed. No such deed is even alleged

ever to have existed. The plaint discloses a possible cause of action under either Section 69 or Section 43 of the Contract Act. The practice of

non-suiting plaintiffs in other than absolutely plain cases is to be deprecated. The art of pleading in this country has not reached the point at which it

is safe to assume that the Pleader gives the exact effect of the contract pleaded and where the line of distinction between the actionable and the

non-actionable was a fine one, as in this case, +he only proper course was to hear the evidence and examine the documents. This is doubly

important where the pleading is applying the vernacular to complex legal conceptions and relations. It is most regrettable that the Subordinate

Judge should have suggested that the plaintiff was officious in depriving the defendants of an opportunity of evading the payment of their legal and

just debts.

2.

The judgments below must be set aside, and the case sent back for trial de novo.

3.

Costs in all three Courts will abide the result of the new trial.